Bread is related to everything.

relate: to have some relation to (dictionary.com)
to have a relationship or connection (Merriam-Webster dictionary)

Bread has a connection, or is related to, in some way, everything in the world.

Prove me wrong.

We have never dug down even to the mantle of the Earth. As such, I contend that the center of the planet Earth is completely unrelated to bread.

The core (center) of the Earth is made of molten metal, such as nickel. The mantle is made from molten rock. In Earth's various environments, this very same type of metal naturally occurs in rocks. Furthermore, these rocks that contain the very same metal that is found in the center of the Earth can be found resting in soil, the material used to grow wheat, which is then harvested and processed into bread.

So the center of the Earth has a tie to the common food, bread.

I'm sorry. I think we can all expect better from such a debate. You're "relationship" is that there is some nickel in soil, and wheat is used to make bread?

- Soil doesn't contain much metal at all.
- Soil isn't molten.
- Your argument might as well be "bread and the center of the Earth are made of atoms" because that's exactly as bad as the relationship you give.
- Soil isn't composed of "rocks" and "rocks" are not composed of metal.
- These "rocks" do not contain the same metal found in the center of the Earth. The metal in the center of the earth is completely different and distinct other metal.
- Recent studies show that with the pressure of the Earth not only do the valence electrons interact but some of the inner electrons. Thus, considering the pressures you can't actually conclude they are even the same atoms as they react completely differently.

Both composed of atoms would be bad enough. But the center of the earth has metal, soil has metal, and wheat grows in soil and wheat makes bread is an underwhelming relationship if I've ever seen one.

What about even more extreme examples of such things? How is bread related to the Andromeda Galaxy? I think the entire premise of the debate is rather flawed. Give me something and I'll relate it to bread hardly suffices to prove the topic of debate. Anything I could come up with would admittedly have a connection to me (because I know about it) and I know about bread as well. To really prove the point you'd need to show the relationship between bread and something really really unknown by anybody. As such, it would be difficult to conclude a relationship at all.